turkeyandpakistan. sothat constitutes the click of the taliban leadership in formally. second is the military side. people who may not be on the ground in afghanistan leading fighters but directing the insurgency on the day-to-day level. they either distressed u.s. intentions lower point* through the 2002 through 2004 period and many are people that did try to cut the deals and were rebuffed so know are on the military side. said talking to them as well there is a sense that they can reconstitute the '90s taliban. so if they hold on a little bit longer they can do that. but it is to understand the different position those with ordinary afghans with a focus on the troop number and talking whether there is 6,000 or 3,000 troops in afghanistan. that is important in the village where it is thought they would say they don't want any troops but in my discussion they don't think about it which is what we face today is a question of state formation. and in 2004. what i mean by that is and attempting to build the afghan state what happened was on the one hand they put money into kabul

are important for the roleofpakistanandmany others. with that, let me turn to our three speakers, each of whom will speak for summer between six and ten minute roughly speaking and then we will open up to questions or dialogue with respect to the audience. we will start with jim, if you are ready, give you the floor. >> my response ability for afghanistan goes back to 2001 and is fair to say the time was present for creation of the current regime and i start by looking back and try to spot the things we did wrong at the time and it strikes me there were three fundamental errors two of which i perceive that the time and tried to do something about and one of which i failed to proceed entirely and did nothing about. one was the decision not to deploy any american or international peacekeepers in the country. we have a country with no police force and no army and we decided security would be an afghan responsibility after the fall of the taliban. i think that was a major mistake. the second was to allow the coalition we successfully built for the war and the peace conference disintegrate.

pakistan, withrespect to the important issues regarding the region. we called the event "back to the future." some people have spoken before about this, and what we mean by that. i think we will let that emerged as the discussion goes on. we know we have a lot of fundamental issues to talk about. certainly, military presence has been an issue talked about in the newspapers all lot. governance is an important issue. technical issues, such as what type of agreements might be signed between the u.s. and afghanistan, are important. the role of pakistan. many others. with that, let me turn to our three speakers, each of whom will speak for six to 10 minutes, roughly speaking. then we'll open it up to dialogue, with the audience. i will give you the floor. >> my responsibilities for afghanistan go back to 2001. it is fair to say i was present at the creation of at least the current regime in kabul. i started by looking back and trying to spot the things we did wrong. it strikes me that there were three fundamental errors, two of which are perceived at the time and tried to do someth

. innovember,pakistanreleased18 of the taliban members by request. they are trying to transform the afghan taliban into a political force. a director from the atlantic council says releasing them may not help the pakistan any people in the long run. -- the pakistani people in the long run. >> there is a very real possibility of sanctuary, as well as militants that have been fighting with the taliban against the state of pakistan, so pakistan risks of not if the taliban comes back to power. that is something it certainly does not favor. it also does not favor that they have control of the border territory. >> now, the latest in our series, looking ahead to 2013. elections scheduled in may of next year in pakistan. it will be the first time the government has completed a full five-year term. and some issues are more basic. our reporter explains. >> the shelves are stocked, but there are few customers. one family has run this vegetables and fruit stand for over 25 years, but their business has been struggling in recent years. >> the customers are very worried. their monthly income is just not

inpakistan. thetop retailers have banned the sale of call of duty and the serioues medal of honor. they say it is portrayed pakistan as a failed state and has been unfairly linked to al qaeda. >> it opens with navy seals storming the docks of the port city. the mission is to destroy in black-market arms shipment. the plans go awry, sparking a chaotic car chase through the sprawling city amid warnings that pakistan's top intelligence agency is on its way. both games are first-person shooter games featuring realistic graphics. the players take on the persona of u.s. special forces agents and can play against other users to run the world. the games are not without controversy. both are extremely popular around the world, including in pakistan. retailers like this one have pulled the games of officials. top is because pakistan's electronic traders association ordered the board, of the gains after shopkeepers complained both unfairly depicted the country as a breeding ground for the excessive violence and where security forces of ties to al qaeda. >> they're basically anti- pakistan. the games a

to the to union, the former ambassador and the former secretaryofpakistantobe hosted by the atlantic council here in washington, this is about 90 minutes. >> we are delighted to have you all. we are delighted to have our distinguished guests. it's pretty rare i think that you get three extraordinary ambassadors sitting next to one another each of whom has tremendous familiarity with the subject. on the council itself has been working on these issues for quite a number of years. this is actually the fourth anniversary of the salvation center. some of you may remember a few years ago the council did a very substantial report with respect to afghanistan. the then head of the council and the national security adviser was involved with some of the people in the audience involved frigate and we followed up on some of that work continuously over the last several years could get this is the latest installment if you will. i think that we all know that we are at an inflection point with respect to afghanistan to read a lot of the important decisions coming. president karzai is here to meet with presi

steve as well about your deep knowledge of afghanistanandpakistanandthe other bordering states. >> this is one that has taken a back burner. we are not that far removed from the election. the election was about by and large nothing more than the economy and which side could do it better. as a result almost every other issue gets pushed to the side, but we have, you know -- there are realtime tables in place in afghanistan about what we have pledged to do, what we will do. you talk about chuck hagel. what chuck hagel's role in all of that, if et wants to be secretary of defense. it's a complicated issue, and it's more complicated politically, andrea, simply because the american public -- this happened in iraq. it's clearly happening in afghanistan. the american public has tired of our involvement in these conflicts. this is not something new. this is something that has been long and coming. if you look at the history in polling at least of when that happens, public opinion almost never sort of sways back up to all of a sudden be supportive and think this was a battle worth fight

factions of pakistani tribal fighters who have struck deals with the government. in 2007 heheldpakistanandsecurity forces -- helped pakistan and security forces. he said the enemy was u.s. forces across the border. >> the groups are united as we're fighting for one cause, against all those were against islam. >> his killing will not bode well for the peace talks with the taliban. it comes at a time when the u.s. and pakistan are making efforts to engage with them. pakistan said the program was counterproductive and of violation of its sovereignty. -- a violation of its sovereignty. >> they have eliminated a crucial link, whether it has any major impact on the reconciliation process, it is difficult to say at the moment. there is someone else who could walk into the footsteps. >> u.s. troops are said to leave in 2014. this death could further jeopardize the prospects of these future -- of a future deal. the killing also coincides with a conditional offer by the pakistanis about a possible cease-fire. military leaders are due to meet on friday. the killing is expected to have an impact

. >> that explosioninpakistan's largestcity killed at least six people. police say a motorcycle bomb exploded close to a political rally. more than a dozen people have been taken to hospital. also in pakistan, a group of teachers and workers have been killed in a drive-by shooting. the gunman attacked their bus killing six women and one man. all of them are pakistanis. a deal to cushion america's fall over the fiscal cliff has run into opposition in congress. republican members and house are now considering a bill that would avoid tax rises for most americans. john is live for us in washington. we understand there has been some movement there in capitol hill. >> with the asian stock markets due to open in about an hour, there has been a little bit of movement here. the house is trying to vote on a bill that was passed in the upper house of the senate in the early hours of new year's day which avoids the fiscal cliff. the house has a problem because many members of -- are unhappy with the deal. what is happening at the moment is that the speaker of the house of representatives, john boehner has basi

's influential board and has served as a senior advisor as recently as 2011 for afghanistanandpakistan. ladiesand gentlemen, dean vali nasr. [cheers and applause] now, when you think of provocative conversation on the big foreign policy challenge of the day you have to think about our next debater. his program on cnn is seen in over 200 countries worldwide but he's anything but a talking head on tv. he writes a column for "the washington post" and is the edit or "time" magazine. please welcome back to the munk debate stage journalist fareed zakaria. [cheers and applause] now we're moments from getting our debate under way but before we hear opening statements, once again, i need this audience assist answer to make sure our debaters stay on time in terms of their opening and closing remark and we move forward as a debate together. so you will see this countdown clock, this clock appear. when it reaches zero applaud. this will let our debaters know that their time is over for their opening and closing statements. before we kick off the debate let's see how the 3,000 people gathered today voted

and significantly discordant situation in both afghanistan and across the borderinpakistan. soi think you probably are going to see an unraveling gradually. i think there's only one afghan brigade that is capable of acting independently. these forces need air support intelligence, all of the kind of logistics and other support that is necessary to be effective. fighting forces, they're not going to have that, and so i am much less an optimist about this eventual outcome. but when you look at the middle east, look at what happened at iraq, look at what happened in syria, the united states no longer leading from behind waiting from behind, and then you look at the decisions concerning afghanistan, you can understand why people throughout the region believe the united states is withdrawing and that is not good for the region. >> schieffer: let me ask you this senator. we went to afghanistan in the beginning because we wanted them to deny al-qaeda a safe haven the terrorists who caused 9/11 and i think to some extent we probably have done that. but as long as they have a safe haven in pakist

. butforpakistan. it'sthe northern partofpakistan. waziristan,which is where the new homeland is of terrorist is who would attack the american homeland. i think what the objective would be is to have a small number of bases, small number of soldiers from which you could direct the trone attacks or special forces. remember, in the raid to kill bin laden, launching area was from afghanistan. and if we hadn't had afghanistan as the base from which we could launch, we'd have to do it by aircraft carrier or other means. it seems we should be infinitely more difficult. that is a strategic objective today. whether obama will be able to negotiate it, i don't know. but he did not succeed negotiating something similar in iraq. >> bret: the taliban is a big question about what happens after 2014. a lot of talk that we have had around this table over the years, 11 of them, has been about the taliban has a tempt calendar than we do. they operate in decades and centuries, while the u.s. has a different calendar here locally. today, karzai said there is a new effort underway to recognize tal taliban. >> we

after recent problems. boeing maintains it is safe to fly. thousands of protesters in frontofpakistan's government,the cleric is holding talks with the government. as of the ruling coalition are negotiating with him after he threatened further action. he wants the government to resign. there's no sign the prime minister will heed his call. the anti-corruption chief of pakistan has been depending the prime minister at the supreme court. he says and ordered to arrest the prime minister is flawed. kamal, i don't know if you have been watching the footage of the pakistani foreign minister is saying that khadri is nobody. so why is the government engaging in talks with him? >> as you said, who is he? many people in pakistan say if he were so insignificant, how is it that he has brought the government to its knees? some parts of the city are paralyzed. people wanting to march on parliament. he was speaking from inside his bulletproof container, sipping hot coffee while is the ots, women and children, were sitting out in the pounding rain. that's when he gave the ultimatum, saying that he w

, or instead, a different kind of mission?andpakistaninparticular, the safe havens that areinpakistan, whatkind of policy will you have? thank you. >> the mission will be fundamentally different. just to repeat, our main reason , should we have troops in afghanistan post-2014, at the invitation of the afghan government, will be to make sure that we are training, assisting, and advising afghan security forces who have taken the lead and are responsible for security throughout afghanistan and and interest the united states has, the reason we went into first place, is to make sure that al qaeda and its affiliates cannot launch an attack against the united states or other countries from afghanistan. we believe we can achieve that mission in a way that is very different from the very active presence that we have had in afghanistan over the last 11 years. president karzai has emphasized the strains that u.s. troop presence is in afghan villages, for example, has created. that will not be a strain if there is a follow-up operation because that will not be our responsibility. that will be th

the challenge, and tried a different location this timeinpakistan. smith: we just got a lot of snow, and we'll be able to track the snow leopard -- and so we'll have a lot better chance of filming it so it's just fantastic. attenborough: after that promising start things didn't go so well for mark. he and the crew spent a fruitless month trudging through the snow. mark spent all christmas in the mountains with no sign of a snow leopard, but it was a much happier new year. we just got -- we just got a report there's a snow leopard up on the ridge. we were too low where we were before so it's just trying to get some height to get a better view of it. attenborough: finally, mark was rewarded with his first ever glimpse. smith: i looked up onto the ridge i could see this leopard-shaped rock which i've seen a million times before and i looked through the binoculars and it was a leopard just sat there it was perched, like just on top of the rock, and it looked down at us and it sort of sat down in a sort of sphinx-like posture. attenborough: a few

as a senior advisor recently as 2011 for afghanistanandpakistantothe late richard holbrook, former munk bedator. now, when you think of provocktiff conversation on the big foreign policy challenges of the day you have to think about our next debator. his flagship global affairs program on cnn is seen in over 200 countries worldwide. but he is anything but a talking head on cable tv. he writes a highly respected column for the "washington post" and is the editor at large of time magazine. his numerous best-selling books include the post american world and the future of freedom. now, we are just moments from getting our debate under way but before we hear opening statements once again i am going to need this audience's assistance as the night goes on to make sure our debators stay on time in terms of their opening and closing remarks and that we move forward as a debate together. so you will see this countdown clock appear when it reaches 0 applaud this will let our debators know that their time is over for their opening and closing statements. and finally before we kick off the debate le

personally intervened to resolve a diplomatic crises and difficult placesfrompakistanandafghanistan to egypt and sudan. and i really look forward to working with you on some of the challenging issues as it faces the country in the world but we start back to something and number of senators have referred to in your opening statement which you said. i just want to say i've been deeply encouraged by your response to senator shaheen's comments and senator rubio. we are sadly foreign commercial service woefully underrepresented and wherever opportunity to advocate for american business and american values and as you know i chaired to the hearings on this. we are about to come out with a report from the subcommittee and i would be interested as the first of my several questions and how you see has successfully competing with china which has a rapidly growing footprint across africa in both economic opportunities and in our differing values agenda and what that makes doing for and how you would address that as secretary e and senator coons were a terrific team with respect to africa and i

strikes in a number of countries includingsomalia,pakistan, afghanistan,and yemen. the inquiry will look at 25 separate from strikes including a u.s. attack in pakistan in 2011 where up to 40 civilians are reported to have been killed. in syria today, war planes continued to bomb rubble-held areas near the capital as president assad was shown on television and attending a mosque service to mark the birthday of the prophet. every day, thousands of refugees to flee the violence. the strain on those trying to shelter them is enormous. we have been to a camp in jordan. >> small figures and a vast crisis. every night now, they come in their thousands. most are women and children, terrorized by war. for the children, how frightening is it? >> they keep screaming. they cannot sleep. they cry all the time. >> in the distance and in the country behind them, smoke rises from an explosion. on this side of the border, they meet soldiers to try to help, not kill. >> at each border crossing, or forces are there to receive them. we take them somewhere south, to restore their sense of security

and protectioninpakistanoriran. in the caseofpakistan, wehave supported the international efforts to help those refugees finding asylum in pakistan. most of those refugees are not seeking resettlement. unhcr has looked to see if there are pockets of refugees both in pakistan and iran there -- that are in need of resettlement. we started to resettle ravages from both countries. we have a small program out of iran. those people will be there to romania or slovakia. project a large increase for afghanistan but we continue to help unhcr and neighboring countries providing asylum to see where individuals can be helton said large waves of refugees. >> mr. bartlett, you identified you have a two-step process -- to identify those who are eligible for this consideration and to ensure they don't present a risk. explain how you identified when and how somebody is eligible for this process and the first place? >> that is more than a one-step process. our largest partner is the un high commissioner for refugees and the work throughout the world. >> is that an american project organization? >> this is

it comes down, it comes down all at once. we're seeing huge drops in china, massive floodsinpakistan. therewas hurricane sandy in the u.s. all around the world, a couple of years back in the kremlin, they had to ban wheat exports because they're having such extreme heat waves the could not export it anymore. we saw the price of grain go up threefold around the world. the message from all of this and what our weather agencies have been telling us, this is the new normal. this is not some freak extreme weather event. we have seen a trend over the past few decades of extreme weather events on the rise, getting worse and worse as we put more carbon pollution into the atmosphere and make climate change worse. >> you're just in antarctica. can you describe going from australia to antarctica and back? >> i just got back to australia yesterday from antarctica, where i was talking to people there about the impacts of climate change. western and predict that is still very cold, but it is actually the most quickly warming land mass. west antarctica has more than three times the global average

organizationsinpakistan's tribalareas who have argued from their perspective on the ground, civilian casualties are rather minimal. but other than some sporadic conversations i've had with people in the tribal areas, i think the data we have publicly is limited. >> brown: what does your data show, or people you talk to show? >> two things. one is tomorrow the united nations is going to announce it's appointing a special investigator into civilian deaths by drones, and through this targeted killing program. so we should be able to get some of the real facts through this u.n. investigation. it's ridiculous that the united states itself hasn't conducted this kind of investigation. of or disclose its results. but that investigation will be done by the u.n. the second thing is general mcchrystal just earlier this month talks of talked about the drone program and how-- how th the-- the attacks on civilians and the civilian casualties are cause, what he calls a vis viseral reaction of hatred in the affected countries, the very people we're trying to win over to our side. >> brown: that's be

is among eight people killed by a u.s. drone strikeinpakistan. asyou probably know the obama administration has stepped up the use of drones overseas to target suspected terrorists. president obama's nomination of john brennan to be the next cia director suggests that trend is likely to continue. brennan, a strong proponent of drones as the president's chief counterterrorism advisor. for more on how the u.s. drone program works let's get to chief washington correspondent james rosen. he is live for us at the state department. james? >> reporter: jon, good morning. this program presents a consistent headache for the diplomats in this building and who must frequently contend with complaints from afghan and pakistani officials who say these drones all too often wind up killing innocent civilians instead of terrorists the drone program is one of the national security initiatives that president obama inherited from the bush administration and one which the current commander-in-chief has dramatically expanded. for all his criticism of president bush during the 2008 campaign over hi

with facilitation for talks. reconciliation requires constructive support from across the region,includingpakistan. wewelcome recent steps that have been taken, and look for more tangible steps, because a stable at future afghanistan is in the interest of not only the afghans and the united states but of the entire region. we reaffirmed the strategic partnership that we signed last year in kabul, an enduring partnership between sovereign nations. this includes deepening ties in trade talks, commerce, , education, and opportunities for all afghans, men and women, boys and girls. this sends a clear message to afghans into the region as afghans stand up they will not stand alone. the united states and the world stands with them. let me close by saying this continues to be a very difficult mission. our forces continue to serve and the tremendous sacrifices every day. the afghan people make significant sacrifices every day. afghan forces will still be growing stronger. we remain vigilant against insider attacks. lasting peace and security will require governments at the ballot that delivers for the af

,pakistan, andsudan. historians will judged his senate years on his impact on foreign policy much the same way so many people recognized ted kennedy's impact on domestic policy. from his many years in the u.s. senate, he has developed a very personal understanding that we represent not just states or governments, but also people. i once asked john why he loves the senate. he said it is the pride he feels in trying to get things done for people. for three years now, he has been working quietly to help a father from massachusetts, whose two sons were kidnapped and taken to egypt. john even called former president mubarak and had a screaming match with him about it. five times he has been to egypt and every time, colin has been at the top of his list in every meeting. every senator has a colin -- it is what we do. we fight for people back home. as secretary, john will understand that and bend over backwards to help us do that. he will be a terrific bridge from the hill to the administration. i know that john kerry cares deeply about our country and our national security. i know he believes in

headquarters. he was an advisor to four president. -- presidents. he led the afghanistan-pakistan review. bruce has written two books in his time here. a third is about to come out. the first two were about al qaeda. the search for al qaeda and the deadly embrace. the new book coming out next month is "avoiding armageddon." it is about the us -- pakistan -- u.s.-pakistan relationship. general stanley mcchrystal spent 34 years in the new oteri. he was -- in the military. he was the director of the joint staff. in military circles, this five- year. of -- five-year period of joint special operations command is what makes them memorable and historic. the reality is that he has done more to carry the fight to al qaeda since 2001 than any other person in this department, possibly in the country. after that, bob gates got up, and the secretary of defense called him one of the finest men at arms this country as ever produced, then continued over the past decade, no single american has inflicted more fear and more loss of life on our country most vicious and violent enemies than dan mcchrystal -- stan m

and the soviets. fromthepakistanborderto the atlantic ocean, you will have something like this, get ready >> are they the same it. ideologically as al qaeda in iraq? >> there are experts that can talk about that. by and large what they represent is extreme for the political islamic theological movements including using violence with anybody that disagree with them. that is what is in common for all of these organizations. calling them al qaeda is loose association. a few years earlier, they invited the city terrorists in iraq to join them as well. so you get these offshoots that are only loosely connected organizations. but they do have a similar theological and political agenda. >> how much of a threat do they represent to americans here? >> of algeria is an important energy exporter and an important country. this is a threat to of jury out. we see the expansion of rebels and these groups coming in, this is a potent threat and a huge area that needs to be dealt with. >> to syria where the bbc team has found evidence of a massacre that takes place on the edge of palms. our international c

reportedly has decided to exclude cia drone strikesinpakistanfromnew legal oversight for targeted killings overseas. the washington post reports counter-terrorism adviser and cia-nominee john brennan has signed off on a plan to exempt the drone attacks in pakistan from a list of operations that would be covered under newly enacted rules. areas covered in the so-called play book include the process for adding names to kill lists, the principles for killing u.s. citizens abroad, and the command chain for authorizing cia or u.s. military strikes outside war zones. the exemption of drone strikes in pakistan would allow the cia to continue carrying them without -- tearing them without a legal framework for a to two years. the hostage standoff in a jury of his ended in the deaths of dozens of people, including up to 48 of the captured workers. algerian forces say they recovered at least 25 bodies after storming the militant held gas complex saturday, bringing the confirmed death toll to least 80. witnesses say the hostages were brutally executed. the toll could have been worse as hundre

that when we leave, the taliban and al qaeda will come back. as long as they're given safe haveninpakistan, they'rejust waiting for us to leave. i do not see any benefit for our country to remain there. host: some of the callers have said we need to keep at least 10,000. some of the stories we have been reading have said anywhere from 3000-6000. you say we should be out of their completely? caller: yes, i think we should just leave. as long as they have one of the most corrupt governments of their -- as long as pakistan allows the taliban and al qaeda safe havens, they are just waiting for us to leave and they will come back in. host: we are going to move on to paul in illinois. paul served as an officer. what kind of work did you do over there? caller: i was army and i work in civil affairs during reconstruction in the 2010 and 2011. host: what kind of response did you get for the reconstructive work you were doing? caller: it was mixed with the afghan people. in areas interested in the work for reconstruction with medical and education. education is the key to success. one said we have

was adviser to four presidents, president obama asked them to lead his afghanistan-pakistan paula's review in early 2009, and do that for a couple of months before apple first returning to brookings. bruce has written two books in the time has been a, a third is about to come out and i will mention that in the second of the first two were about al qaeda and then about the is pakistan relationship. so the search for al qaeda, the deadly embrace, his new book coming out next month is avoiding armageddon. it's a story by the u.s.-india pakistan relationship and crisis management over the last half-century or so. general stan mcchrystal is a 1976 graduate of west point, spent 34 years in u.s. army, retiring as a four-star general the summer 2010. he has been command in afghanistan. use the correct of the joint staff but perhaps the military circles most of all as i mentioned this five year period at joint special operations command makes a memorable and historic. general casey at his retirement ceremony in 2010 said of general stand, the thrill is stand has done more to carry the fight of al q

and successful diplomatic intervention inafghanistan,pakistan, andsedan. -- sudan. historians will be judged his senate years on his impact on foreign policy at much the same way so many people recognized ted kennedy's impact on domestic policy. from his many years in the u.s. senate, he has developed a very personal understanding that we represent not just states or governments, but also people. i want to ask john why he loves the senate. he said it is the pride he feels in trying to get things done for people. for three years now, he has been working quietly to help a father from massachusetts, whose two sons were kidnapped and taken to eject. john even called former president mubarak and had a screaming match with him about it. five times he has been to egypt and every time, colin has been at the top of his list in every meeting. every senator has -- it is what we do. we fight for people back,. as secretary, john will understand that and bend over backwards to help us do that. he will be a terrific bridge from the hill to the administration. i know that john kerry cares deeply about our c

president. -- presidents. he led the afghanistan-pakistan review. bruce has written two books in his time here. a third is about to come out. the first two were about al qaeda. the search for al qaeda and the deadly embrace. the new book coming out next month is "avoiding armageddon." it is about the us -- pakistan -- u.s.-pakistan relationship. general stanley mcchrystal spent 34 years in the new oteri. he was -- in the military. he was the director of the joint staff. in military circles, this five- year. of -- five-year period of joint special operations command is what makes them memorable and historic. the reality is that he has done more to carry the fight to al qaeda since 2001 than any other person in this department, possibly in the country. after that, bob gates got up, and the secretary of defense called him one of the finest men at arms this country as ever produced, then continued over the past decade, no single american has inflicted more fear and more loss of life on our country most vicious and violent enemies than dan mcchrystal -- stan mcchrystal. that makes him sound pr

bin laden might be living in a compoundinpakistan. >>the intelligence case was entirely circumstantial. nobody saw osama bin laden, had a full id on him. >> how could he live for many years inside a walled compound and never leave? why would osama bin laden want to be 35 miles from islamabad? why would he want to be steps away from pakistan's equivalent of west point? did any of this make sense? >> narrator: the president called together his national security team. >> he said to his national security team in the situation room, "i want everybody to tell me what your view is, what you would do, what your recommendation is." and he got a very mixed response. i think of the people in the room, it was probably 50%, roughly, were in favor of the raid option that we ended up taking. >> narrator: only the president could make the final decision on whether to send u.s. troops into pakistan. >> he also knew that if it had gone wrong, there would not only have been dramatically negative consequences for the men he sent in, and for our country's security, but also for his own polit

attitudesinpakistan. wehad to convince the pakistani government and populous that a stable afghanistan not under a taliban rule was in their interest and that the nato istaff mission was achievable because it was one thing for the pakistanis to generally wish we would succeed but in the summer of 2009 they didn't believe we could or would and they were hedging their bets to avoid paying the price if we didn't. of course we had to affect the american populous. we had to show parents where their sons and daughters were in a very difficult war a long way away. the first thing we had to was change people's attitude and say this is a new ball game. we're going to do this more seriously. we are going to do this right. we are going to focus and we are going to take everybody's interests into account. we can succeed and we will succeed. >> rose: success would be defined as? >> an afghanistan that could defend it's own sovereignty. i did not think it was our mission to craft a perfect afghanistan. i thought it was our aspiration, our goal to create a strong enough afghan security force, stable

threat to united states faces is between the mountainsofpakistanandafghanistan. previouslythese are issues thate addressed. where does he think afghanistan is going to go? what did he think at this one point that it was such a vital and strategic interest? the president himself tries to address that issue. senator hagel has made a lot of statements over the years about the middle east and central asia that i think have to be addressed. it is not simply about israel and the u.s.. it is about the statements and the votes that senator hagel been made, sanctions on iran, talking with the dictatorship in syria about not signing a resolution be, asking europe to designate hezbollah as a terrorist organization. votes against signaling that the i iranian revolutionary guard was a terrorist organization. all these things that suggest that his views about the middle east and the palestinian-is really conflict, brought together with those -- israeli conflict, brought together with those other statements. people often say that presidents should be given to deference to his appointees. i agr

,pakistancertainlyhas taken out a whole codry of leadership. what we are seeing now are people who have migrated back to other parts of the world where they came from, primarily, who are, in effect, affiliates. part of the jihadist syndicate, like maghreb uses that name. the fact is, they are terrorists, they are extremists. they have designs on overthrowing existing governments, even these new islamist governments of controlling territory. so although there has been the decimation of core al qaeda in the afghanistan/pakistan region, we do have to contend with the wannabes and affiliates going forward. >> thank you, madam. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you, madam secretary for being here and it's great to see you today. you have been, i think, a real and dedicated public servant for this country and your travels around the world as many here have talked about it, the million miles that you have put on and all the countries you visited and i think you've been to many countries where they've never had a secretary of state and i've seen firsthand when i've been to many of these coun

, climbing support for the state department. youhavepakistanandafghanistan, with the drawal from afghanistan that will only make it harder, and that has impact on pakistan. china, and russia. leadership in russia, as you know, very, very complicated. where does he look first for support, and, you know, who wants this job? >> i would say the middle east -- the hard thing that you hit on is the challenges for a secretary of state and for the united states generally in foreign policy have not waned. they have probably increased. in libya and benghazi and secretary clinton tried to make this point and senator kerry as well that the funding for all of these things is -- it's a fine it amount of money, and it's shrinking at the moment. the difficulty of a world that remains kredably complex, probably more complex, with our somewhat increasingly limited ability to sort of address every hotspot that we like, it's a very, very difficult challenge for any secretary of state. john kerry or anyone else. we saw it with hillary clinton. yes, she had successes clearly, but she also centeringled

Search Results 0 to 49 of about 220 (some duplicates have been removed)